Guest viewing limit reached
  • You have reached the maximum number of guest views allowed
  • Please register below to remove this limitation

Lets take a look at what USP labs Oxyelite Pro REALLY is....

TAG! I wanna see a USP labs rep in here.
 
WilteredFire said:
I think as the op says ... The question of why there is an ingredient in there that is NOT stated on the label needs to be addressed...The fillers, underdosed ingredients or anything else should be discussed or debated later guys.

And its not about "its safe, it still works" or the "who cares" attitude, its a matter of principal when any company steps over the line and starts to spike a product or put something in even in small doses that the consumer is not aware of, brings the companys integrity, and honesty into serious question imho...Jus sayin.

Anyway hope we can get clarification on this.
Click to expand...

The first question here is whether or not the lab results are acts or originals not whether or not the product was spiked. After that is answered, and if it the product is spiked then your question should be answered.
 
CTDeuce said:
and if you read what I posted, what I said was you'd have to be less than intelligent to put your stock into an image that does not have any real information about where it came from and who made these findings. I mean seriously....the original poster was even worried about using their own name to post it. If this doesn't send you a red flag, you're special in a way I can't even begin to explain.
Click to expand...

Image Shimiage! first off you haven't answered as a USP rep, which you're not, whether or not these findings are true or not. Which is what this thread is about if i'm not mistaken. So your OPINION about what intelligent ppl should think on this subject is just that, your OPINION. So what if the OP was worried? that's his problem, but if this type of propaganda isn't true then a USP rep needs to clear this up. No disrespect to USP. I'm sure there is a logical explanation, but I hope it's not BS.
 
USPLabs said:
Invalid Link Removed
Click to expand...

Ok my last comment was a little to late! But that's what I'm talking about!

Let’s face the facts.....no one tests a product because it sucks or is ineffective. The product is tested in hopes the competition finds an illicit substance because the product works as designed. It destroys fat and it does it quickly.
 
ax1 said:
hi, thanks for posting in this thread.

are you a USP rep? or are you directly involved with the company?

im sure more will come out soon, and if i find anything i will post here.

but i hope the truth will be settled in the end, whatever that may be.
Click to expand...

Seriously?
 
funkd0c said:
Image Shimiage! first off you haven't answered as a USP rep, which you're not, whether or not these findings are true or not. Which is what this thread is about if i'm not mistaken. So your OPINION about what intelligent ppl should think on this subject is just that, your OPINION. So what if the OP was worried? that's his problem, but if this type of propaganda isn't true then a USP rep needs to clear this up. No disrespect to USP. I'm sure there is a logical explanation, but I hope it's not BS.
Click to expand...

lol you're right, my opinion shouldn't detect intelligence.

what should is that you're asking a USP rep to come clear it up when their owner has posted multiple posts before yours with the companies official reply ;). Sorry man, had to.
 
I can personally say OEP fukking works especially when is stacked right.
 
CTDeuce said:
lol you're right, my opinion shouldn't detect intelligence.

what should is that you're asking a USP rep to come clear it up when their owner has posted multiple posts before yours with the companies official reply ;). Sorry man, had to.
Click to expand...

your right. I had started writing my reply before he had posted that in this thread. Shows how slow I am at posting my thoughts. haha:grumpy::stooges::bigok:
 
Alright, as I am affiliated with another company, I wanted to stay out of this as much as possible, for respect of USPLabs. This doesn't mean my opinion is negative in nature, I have used USPlabs products with good results, however, it is no longer my place to comment in threads such as this one.

The only thing I wanted to say, is keep this to an adult discussion. Continually saying "Can we get a rep in here" is pretty pointless, you have the god damn owner of the company responding, what is a rep going to do for you? I also urge you to read the commentary USPLabs is posting, rather then blindly following lab results that are header less, easily faked, etc. Then, and only then, if you want a response, feel free to do so.
 
rochabp said:
i hate it when companies under dose something it straight up pisses me off, seriously...
idk i guess i expected more from USP
it still puzzles me how it get so many good reviews
doesnt add up
Click to expand...

It got the reviews because it WORKED, that's why...I am not sure why that is hard to understand?

The question here is whether the lab results are real

Then, the question is whether it is mislabeled, that is all.
 
ax1 said:
actually i ran into 4 others on the boards without looking for them, but this is going off topic.

anyways here is an official response from usp labs
Click to expand...

You ran into 4 people "from the boards", really?

So, you are putting who you ran into from the boards, which of those you have NEVER MET IN YOUR LIFE to the 13 people that I have lived with, eaten with, and trained with for 5+ years?

You are kidding me?

Like before, never have I ran into anyone that stated what you stated above. Also, if this was off topic then why even state that it made you hungry? Were you trying to justify some angle or just stating some random, disconnected fact?
 
hardknock said:
Also, if this was off topic then why even state that it made you hungry? Were you trying to justify some angle or just stating some random, disconnected fact?
Click to expand...

i went off topic, i screwed up, ok? if you really want an answer though, im good at fat loss, and OEP was the worst fat burner ive ever used. nothing against USP labs...its just my own experience and it may just be a rare scenario. i love their Recreate product though.
 
Wow all this i wanna hear from a USP rep stuff is stupid when the owner has multiple times come in and tried to clear up any misunderstanding out there. I have used USP products multiple times and i love my results. This just seems like another time where people want to stir up a fire. USP has been highly successfull as of late in the supplement world and some people seem to want to bring them down. If you don't want to use their products cause of some "lab" results thats your choice.
 
ax1 said:
i went off topic, i screwed up, ok? if you really want an answer though, im good at fat loss, and OEP was the worst fat burner ive ever used. nothing against USP labs...its just my own experience and it may just be a rare scenario. i love their Recreate product though.
Click to expand...

So, you said that about hunger because OEP made you eat thus making it a terrible fat burner?
I am just trying to get the facts away from assumption here?
 
hardknock said:
So, you said that about hunger because OEP made you eat thus making it a terrible fat burner?
I am just trying to get the facts away from assumption here?
Click to expand...

the reason i state i had a bad experience was due to it increasing my hunger. i did eat a little more more than i wanted to, and i felt like i needed to eat alot more. there were workouts i had to leave early as i developed serious hunger pains after about the 45 minute period. i tried OEP several times only to get the same effect (i had 2 bottles on hand.) i cannot recommend, but i can only judge by personal experience. no other product has ever had this negative effect on me. i posted a log here Invalid Link Removed

if this product works for most people, then that is very satisfactory to me. i just hope their label is indeed right and honest.
 
What is with all this crap USPlabs getting lately? Pink, now this...
 
Anyone proved the report is real to begin with? anyone bothered to question whoever posted the report?
 
CTDeuce said:
right, I can read what you posted.

and if you read what I posted, what I said was you'd have to be less than intelligent to put your stock into an image that does not have any real information about where it came from and who made these findings. I mean seriously....the original poster was even worried about using their own name to post it. If this doesn't send you a red flag, you're special in a way I can't even begin to explain.
Click to expand...

Well said.
 
luelinks said:
I can personally say OEP fukking works especially when is stacked right.
Click to expand...

Stacking is optional. It works just as effectively stand-alone.
 
rochabp said:
i hate it when companies under dose something it straight up pisses me off, seriously...
idk i guess i expected more from USP
it still puzzles me how it get so many good reviews
doesnt add up
Click to expand...

You apparently regard the original report as gospel.
 
Im confused honestly as i didnt take the time to read the full novel on the first page, but i will say this ,OEP works...period. Im not affraid to call it like i see it and ive done that before with products, OEP ive used on numerous occasions and each time ive gotten "Severely lean" using it! :bigok:
 
noot said:
What is with all this crap USPlabs getting lately? Pink, now this...
Click to expand...

Yah it's fuggin pathetic to the point of being childish.. my sympathies to those at USPLabs... All the usual suspects have arrived, you know who you are!! lol

This post should not have been started, first the study was posted anonymously and without a header. The proper way to deal with this if you have concerns is to ask the company directly, trying to stir up shyte with something as unfounded as this document is ridiculous.

I have an old school saying I live by "don't write checks with your mouth that your azz can't cash"

Sorry I'm just tired of all the bull****e...
 
DreamWeaver said:
Yah it's fuggin pathetic to the point of being childish.. my sympathies to those at USPLabs... All the usual suspects have arrived, you know who you are!! lol

This post should not have been started, first the study was posted anonymously and without a header. The proper way to deal with this if you have concerns is to ask the company directly, trying to stir up shyte with something as unfounded as this document is ridiculous.

I have an old school saying I live by "don't write checks with your mouth that your azz can't cash"

Sorry I'm just tired of all the bull****e...
Click to expand...

yeah man, I have to agree, this is lame.. .. "anonymous" lab test? OH WAIT!! I just came across an anonymous lab test my self!! let me post it real quick:


** ** * * *** ** LABS

Client sample : USP labs oxy e

Awesome 10000 mg



how do you explain that one?
 
this is an interesting post:

DR_P said:
I am so sick of all this nonsense. It is fine to dismantle certain things, when you have substantial proof. However, when you are a clueless moron and start gang banging a company or a product, without having any qualified argument, then this is just poor.


As I have already told ten pages ago, the Lab report presented by the OP is IRRELEVANT because it used standards that can or cannot match the active ingredients in the propreitary extracts. The standards have been used on a pure speculative basis and therefore their information is null.

It is particularly funny to see how reps of a certain company that used to bash USPLabs quite a few years ago, again anda again "engage" in threads like this, pretending to "contribute" to the discussion although they don't get tired to emphasize how they are not interested in other companies or products but just focus on themselves.

Oh funny world!


But back to the topic at hand. USPLabs has a track record of not fully disclosing the nature of proprietary extracts and the specific actives derived from these extracts. Well, this is how they work. That's good for them because they are protecting their IP from copycats.
Back in the day, when people found out what "geranamine" actually is, dozens, if not hundreds of products popped up, containing the 1,3 ingredient. Nowadays, you must search in order to find a preworkout product that does NOT contain 1,3.

So, USPLabs uses this method to protect their business. Although, as a curious and educated consumer, I would like to understand exactely the composition of extracts, I can still understand if a company doesn't want to disclose them. Heck, even the above mentioned company whose reps aggressively attack other products, uses "proprietary blends" in almost all of their products, so they are doing basically the same: they are hiding information from the consumer. Of course, in their eyes, it is absolutely fine to do this in order to protect their business but it is unacceptable, when USPLabs does that in order to actually protect their business. Double standards at its finest here.

To come to a conclusion: As I have already said from the beginning, the proposed lab test is not suitable to prove anything beside the fact that the OP has been fooled by the lab he paid good money for doing the tests. Apparently, the lab told him that they were able to test for the ingredients in OEP, while actually NOBODY can test quantitatively for them because nobody has a proven reference standard because nobody knows which particular ingredients the plants have been xtracted for.


LOL, I am gonna do my summer cut with OxyElite Pro and stack it with Biotivia Bioshape. I am expecting nothing but excellent results.
Click to expand...
 
I just wasted several minutes reading this thread. If anyone of you actually is gullible enough to see some erroneous test and place stock in it as 100% gospel, then I would like to sell you some very rare and uber expensive Frisbees that are made from 100% UFO grade concrete. Seriously, PM me and I will pick you up in my UFO for a low, low price.

OEP is very strong, and works just like the old ECA did for me. This thread should be closed.

The WTF1 Gene is strong with a lot of you.
 
As there appears to be a lag in comprehension between the point of original proof (the "anonymous" lab test) and the point of rebuttal (Jacob's reply) allow me to provide a summary.

First, an anonymous user posted an equally anonymous assay which purportedly reveals that not only is Oxy Elite Pro underdosed (containing insignificant amounts of Cirsium oligophylum and Bauhnia purpurea), but it is also contaminated with ingredients not featured on the label (methysynephrine).

In response, Jacob (USPlabs) produced an opposing assay, from an identified lab, that definitely shows that methylsynephrine is not a component of Oxy Elite Pro. Additionally, his rebuttal contains an explanation for the apparent dearth of the ingredients mentioned earlier - which of course is assuming the anonymous report is not a hoax, and given the lack of contact information, less-than-scrupulous manner in which it was posted, and the most basic of errors indicated in the results, seems more and more likely.

Put briefly, the explanation simply meant to draw attention to the concept of reference standards, which are required to identify the "chemical silhouette" of any given organic compound through HPLC (high performance liquid chromatography). As Jacob's response alludes to, HPLC does not simply work by inputting the compound of interest, noting the peaks, and miraculously coming to an answer: rather, in order to identify any compound you must possess the reference standard, which again, is the compound's chemical silhouette that a lab validates its results against.

Now, the most important facet to this argument, and one that Dr P's reply above me and Jacob's rebuttal both stress, is this: reference standards do not exist for Cirsium oligophylum and/or Buhnia purpurea, and even if they did, this lab would have to know the exact compound(s) that USPlabs standardizes these plants for, and they do not. In lay terms, the test is entirely irrelevant because it attempts to "reveal" compounds the lab cannot discover. That is the end of the argument, with no further possibilities or points of contention, literally.

This whole debate, and all its possible implications, is truly a disappointing farce pure and simple. Whether the "lab report" was created on Microsoft Word, or the "anonymous poster" is too moronic to interpret the results, these "results" are worth significantly less than the paper they were apparently printed on.
 
More wasted time for me. I really think ax1 has an axe to grind here, the title was very leading and in poor taste.
 
So I wasted about 10 minutes reading through all this crap... And can't believe people would actually believe a lab report that a middle school kid could create on his computer.

I do wish more companies would post last results if there products to show the consumer you are getting what you pay for, but as stated this opens the door for quality products to be copied easily and others profit from one companies hard work.

I have much respect for USP... Not many compaines have the owner posting on the boards and answering questions. They are a very innovated company that isn't just releasing the same product everyone else is. Thats a far cry from what USP does.

There will always be haters esp in this multimillion dollar industry.
 
To Jacob; with Great Success comes much attention; either they love you or hate you.... Don't sweat it. It does not matter what they think, all that matters is that you stay clean/integrit and keep bringing home the greens, nough said.
 
Well Ty for the info Jacob, like usual there r alot of haters out there with a ax to grind! Only thing the don't realize is that they aren't really bringing usplabs bad publicity, just bringing more attention to a certain product and with your reasonable rebutle, there will probally b sum people who will give oxy a try that hadn't even thought about it. It reminded me I was almost out and needed to order more. Keep up the good work
 
Personally, I like to know what I am putting in my body, proprietary or not. I think it should be made clear on each label.

Quite frankly, I am sick of all the "proprietary" crap that supplement companies throw in on their labeling.
 
But if everyone posted the exact numbers and didn't make it proprietary that just opens the doors for all these other companies to copy a great product like Oxyelite which USP did a great job in producing. To have the owner come out and so publicly defend his product so vigioursly is a far cry from what other companies around the world would do. I applaud Jacob for being a man and clearing up everything so well when really he didn't need to, even going as far as providing a lab test. USP has always provided great products at a fair price, with plenty of knowledgeable people on the boards to answer whatever question you have. They will continue to have my business.
 
DeerDeer said:
Personally, I like to know what I am putting in my body, proprietary or not. I think it should be made clear on each label.

Quite frankly, I am sick of all the "proprietary" crap that supplement companies throw in on their labeling.
Click to expand...

Let me ask you this questions.

If you spent thousands upon thousands to research, extract and test a compound and then mass manufacture and advertise, you would list it on your label so every company in the world has the blue print to your innovation?
 
USPLabs said:
Let me ask you this questions.

If you spent thousands upon thousands to research, extract and test a compound and then mass manufacture and advertise, you would list it on your label so every company in the world has the blue print to your innovation?
Click to expand...

i think there should be protection both ways.

1st the consumer should have the right to know exactly what they are consuming, and how much they are consuming of it

2nd i think the owners of the companies, such as you should have their formulas better protected. this is a far reach, and overseas companies can copycat anyways but i understand what you are saying.

in the end its the choice of the consumer weather or not to take something that they dont know the quantities of.
 
ax1 said:
i think there should be protection both ways.

1st the consumer should have the right to know exactly what they are consuming, and how much they are consuming of it

2nd i think the owners of the companies, such as you should have their formulas better protected. this is a far reach, and overseas companies can copycat anyways but i understand what you are saying. in the end its the choice of the consumer weather or not to take something that they dont know the quantities of.
Click to expand...

that is when its important to read reviews of the product before you buy it and consume it :-)

OEP is one of the most highly regarded and rated products available, hats off to USPlabs, they have a top notch product here

:djparty:
 
I liked a point DR_P made on another forum.

USPLabs brought 1,3-dimethylamylamine to the supplement world a year or so ago. Once the compound was actually figured out by the other companies...well...now try finding a preworkout supplement WITHOUT 1,3-dimethylamylamine. That is why protection of ingredients is important.
 
Didn't IBE and Ergopharm use 1,3 dimethylamylamine before USP? X-force and Amp respectively. Which product was the 1st one that USP used it in?
 
It could be possible. Look at air born. They had a recall for false claims. Remember when ginsing was very popular in 1994 and companys sold it despite the contamination it had. Weather its true or not brings up the question of the supply. Look at all the glutamine products on the market yet studies done on it were IV or not enough to be valid in caps/powder.
 
USPLabs said:
Let me ask you this questions.

If you spent thousands upon thousands to research, extract and test a compound and then mass manufacture and advertise, you would list it on your label so every company in the world has the blue print to your innovation?
Click to expand...
While it would be nice to have a $10 Chinese copy, I guess I see and agree with you point. :D
 
Leggo my Ego said:
Didn't IBE and Ergopharm use 1,3 dimethylamylamine before USP? X-force and Amp respectively. Which product was the 1st one that USP used it in?
Click to expand...

Due respect to both Ergopharm and IBE, but I believe the point the individual is making is this: while these companies utilized 1,3-dimethylamylamine prior to USPlabs, JACK3D was precisely the product that popularized the use of 1,3-dimethylamylamine in powder-based, pre-workout supplementation.

It is simply validating the notion that competitors - not just for USPlabs, but more generally - follow suit conceptually, and this is with the implementation of proprietary blends. Without being able to protect one's intellectual property, how should one's success remain one's own?

On the one hand, individuals argue that consumers have the absolute right to know the precise combination of ingredients in any given formulation, but on the other, that also implies any competitor ought to have the right to wholesale imitate the success of others.
 
Don't get me wrong, I love jack3d and have gone thru many containers of it. I just didn't think USP was the 1st to use 1,3 dimeth and was stating as such. OEP worked favorably for me but at the same time there were so many variables at the time it's hard to quantify it's contribution. LOL. Either way, I liked it
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top